WASHINGTON -- Legislation to update a 40-year-old law requiring that chemicals be tested for safety could pass Congress as early as next week as U.S. House and Senate lawmakers agreed on a compromise bill.

The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act would require the Environmental Protection Agency to test chemicals using "sound and credible science" and impose regulations if they are shown to pose a health risk.

The EPA would set priorities for evaluating chemicals and would not first have to show they pose a potential risk. Manufacturers could ask the EPA to evaluate a particular chemical if they are willing to cover those costs.

Chemical safety regulations initially were enacted in 1976, during the administration of President Gerald Ford. The original law exempted chemicals already being used, which prevented the federal government from later regulating asbestos. When he served in the Senate, Lautenberg (D-N.J.) spearheaded efforts to update the rules. He died in 2013 at age 89.

"I'm encouraged that we were able to come together to find agreement on chemical safety reform through a bill that honors the legacy of Senator Frank Lautenberg and will help keep American families and children safe from toxic chemicals," said U.S. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), who succeeded Lautenberg in the Senate.

U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-6th Dist.), the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee and a co-sponsor of the initial House bill, is reviewing the final measure and is continuing talks, spokesman Anton Becker said.

The final legislation drew support from both industry groups and the environmental community.

"As with any compromise, this legislation balances the priorities and interests of multiple stakeholders, while producing an agreement that pragmatic industry, environmental, public health and labor groups can ultimately support," said former Rep. Cal Dooley (D-Calif.), president and chief executive of the Washington-based American Chemistry Council.

Still, Jeff Tittel, president of the New Jersey Sierra Club, said his organization would oppose the Lautenberg bill because it allows the federal government to prevent states from imposing tougher regulations of chemicals. State restrictions enacted on or after April 22 could be pre-empted by federal regulations, though they could apply for waivers.

"That to us is a deal killer," Tittel said. "I don't think the senator would support weakening protections in New Jersey."